• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Why Would Any Radio Station(s) want to carry Buffalo Bills Games?

The Buffalo Bills are New York State’s ONLY football team. The Jets and Giants are from New Jersey.
Therefore despite the poor performance from the team over the past decade, there are still some die-hard fans of the Buffalo Bills that would be incensed if the team were not broadcast locally on either television or radio.

As for the theory that the Bills will not be in Buffalo in a few years, people like Dr. Smith are hoping that Jim Kelly and a group of investors will purchase the team when Ralph Wilson dies and keep the team in Buffalo.

Let’s be practical for a moment.

If another city comes along and offers this, or any other group of investors, the money to rebuild the team, along with a brand new stadium in a major market like Los Angeles, that group of investors would jump at the opportunity. Why? Because when it comes down to it, football is a business.

Now if you Bills fans want to ensure that the team stays in Buffalo, then do what Green Bay has done; make it a community team by selling shares of stock.
 
Now if you Bills fans want to ensure that the team stays in Buffalo, then do what Green Bay has done; make it a community team by selling shares of stock.
Click to expand...

Good idea, but I believe the Packers non profit set up is a grandfathered situation. NFL rules now prohibit any other franchise sold to a community owned non profit(it figures, it's all about maximum profit).
 
Everyone who preaches doom about the Bills' future presence forgets one thing...on top of the $600 million or more it would take to buy the Bills from Ralph Wlson or his heirs, it will take AT LEAST as much for anyone to construct a new 75,000 seat (plus luxury boxes and corporate suites) of the kind the team would need to remain viable.

As of now there is NO market in North America with such a facility, together with the population base to support it within an hour's drive, except for communities that already have an NFL team.

MAYBE there's someone willing to throw a billion dollars or more away on a team plus the cash to build a facility, together with the patience to wait through the uncertainty of arranging for a brand new facility to play in, both the cost of construction and the ability to clear thickets of regulations, together with the tens of millions of dollars in losses while the new stadium is under construction and the tens of millions more per year to cultivate a new market. But can anyone identify such a fool with infinitely more money than brains? Has such a person either stepped forward, or even surfaced in speculation? And is there any local or state government able to help pay the freight in these tough fiscal times, without being willing to risk the infinite and unending wrath of voters just waitting for the chance to end political careers in the next election cycle?

Point is, even if you accept the proposition that the Bills are thinking of moving on, they're all dressed up with no profitable place to go. Even Los Angeles (which has lived almost 2 decades without the NFL and doesn't seem bursting with passion for its return) is an iffy proposition (ancient field dating to the '32 Olympics with no modern revenue-producing amenities and no economical way to provide them, no NFL-ready stadium within 120 mles, and none likely to be built this decade or even beyond); San Antonio more so (the Alamo Dome is only half the size an NFL team needs)...and Toronto has been lukewarm at best in its interest for the Bills and less than passionate about giving them a shiny new place to play that's 50% bigger than the Rogers Centre. If somehow they could find a way to get a new stadium built in the outer boroughs of New York City, east of the East River, that would be a viable location, maybe the only one even if you're willing to start from a greenfield and build a new venue. There's about as much chance of the Jets and Giants permitting that to happen, as there is for a Christmas Eve snowball fight in hell.

The only place that's a viable destination for the Bills the rest of this decade, and probably beyond, is the place they are now. Anything else is a loser on the bottom line far into the future. Entercom knows it, or else they wouldn't have signed up for the Bills.
 
I wonder how long Jacksonville will put up with that NFL team they have, or vice versa. :) There would be an answer to the L.A. issue!

cd
 
First....I will say it is awesome
We can have such discussions...
Without it getting personal...
That is what is great about this board and
The posters who live here...
-
One thing we are -ALL-forgetting:
The agenda of the NFL.
Where they WANT a team and what rules
Will be loosely enforced or broken to do so,
....if they as a whole want the NFL in Canada,
With the "Toronto" team playing a western game
As part of the new "international" rules...
That they set up....then, the NFL could up 'n move...

Everyone reads this and says what ?!?!? There are
No "international clauses" in the league bi-laws, etc etc...

Well, I thought the same thing along the lines with the Saints.
Follow me here:
It is the League's rules, and they singled out the Saints..
And pretty much ONE Man decided to be judge,
Jury, and the appeal system... And when it was over with
OBVIOUS flaws ....no apology was issued. That is power -

....come to think of it, how did the Toronto series even get started..?
Did the league approach the bills or did the bills approach the league ?
 
There are other teams that are better candidates to move to LA than the Buffalo Bills. The NFL would not like to tangle with NY interests over this matter. As far as putting a team in LA is concerned, San Diego and Oakland are near the bottom of the league in attendance. Buffalo has outdrawn both of them - in spite of the anemic Toronto numbers. Florida also has two teams in the bottom 3 - Tampa and Miami. The St. Louis - formerly the LA - Rams are also near the bottom of the heap.

IOW, there are better candidates for LA if the league is indeed hot on making that happen. Considering the past performance in LA, and the other problems involved, I think that it's a better than even bet that the Buffalo Bills will be staying put if a local group steps up with the cash.
 
Radio_bored-Op said:
It is definitely an interesting problem.....
They stay and they always lose!
if they leave, they would be missed....
Click to expand...

The Bills, you can't live with them, you can't live without them! ;) As for the radio part of the business I guess people don't have to worry about the WGR boys taking it easy on the "home team" since they acquired the broadcast rights. The tone has been harsh of late, as it should be. Maybe next year? :(
 
You can take the Jaguars off the LA-Bound List. The team's new owner, Shahid Khan, has said numerous times that the team will stay put, long term. What's more, the Jags have a lease that binds the team to the city through 2027 and there are punitive financial measures in place which prevent the team from leaving.

We can say all the nice things we want about the Ralph, the great sight lines and all that; but the stadium is one of the oldest in the NFL and is in need of upgrading. Consider this: the Ralph opened (as Rich Stadium) in 1973. It's nearly 40 years old. War Memorial Stadium stadium was completed in 1937; it was 36 years old when the Bills departed its lush confines. So the Bills are playing in a stadium that's older than the Rockpile when they left it.

WGR deserves credit for holding the Bills responsible through most of this dreadful season. Some won't believe it, but having seen it from the other side of the desk, it's a chore to interview a coach and GM of a losing team. It's a lot easier to interview a winner, to cheer and get caught in the updraft of a team that's going to the playoffs. It's been 13 years since the Bills caught that updraft.

"Ponderous, effin' ponderous. I want a concerted effort..."
 
Ok, if the story in the Buffalo News this morning is correct, the 10-year deal to keep the Bills in Buffalo has an out in the seventh year (2019):

"The Bills would have to pay a $400 million relocation penalty if they leave during the time of the lease – with one exception. In the seventh year of the contract they could pull out with only a $29 million penalty."

That looks to me like Cuomo forcing the team to stay unit immediately after his second term is over.
My new odds: Bills stay til 2019 = 100 percent. Bills leave in 2019 = 100 percent.
 
Mmm, I wouldn't read too much into the 7 year clause.

Things are not going to change for the Bills, Buffalo and Western NY will remain their best option as far as the eye can see. One way or another the LA option will close within the next 3 to 6 years as a result of any of several other teams in worse shape and struggling to sell tickets (the Saints, the Rams, the Jaguars, the Chargers, the Panthers, to name a few) will move in, figuring that the LA option may be a panacea. That's assuming anyone ever makes a move to build the totally new stadium the LA market needs to be competitive. Toronto is clearly NOT an option since the last Bills "home" game at Rogers Center earlier this month barely drew 40,000, while playing the game in the Ralph would have drawn over 30,000 more. San Antonio will never build a stadium double the size of the Alamo Dome the way they'd need to for the NFL, they're more likely to tweak the dome a little to bring in an MLB team instead. Ten years from now the Bills will still be in Buffalo because ten years from now we'll still be saying every city in North America that can support an NFL team and provide it a suitable place to play, has at least one NFL team. You can question whether NY state and Erie County needed to sweeten the pot as much as they did by picking up the lion's share of stadium refurbishing...frankly the Ralph as-is may be better than any alternative they'll have the rest of this decade. But it will be improved. The 7 year clause could be something the league wants to make sure the stadium is kept current and the market doesn't implode further (or the team fails to pull in more fans from Rochester to make up for Buffalo area shrinkage--something they needn't worry about because there are often almost as many Rochesterians at the Ralph as Buffalonians these days).

Entercom can relax knowing they have a major focus for WGR's programming, and WCMF's, for the rest of this decade and beyond.
 
OldNumber7 said:
"The Bills would have to pay a $400 million relocation penalty if they leave during the time of the lease – with one exception. In the seventh year of the contract they could pull out with only a $29 million penalty."
Click to expand...

Looks to me like the Bills are committed to stay for seven years and if a new stadium isn't approved, or under construction, by then they have the right to bail for a mere 29 mil and move to a new home city.

My bet. The idea of a new downtown stadium is likely to become a major political issue in the not too distant future.
 
"My bet. The idea of a new downtown stadium is likely to become a major political issue in the not too distant future."

Even in that event, that stadium is more likely to be built in the Buffalo region than anywhere else. California's fiscal crunch makes LA out of the question. Toronto can't draw 42,000 to a game. what other market can build a stadium and support a team with a weekly 70,000-fan base attendance, that doesn't already have at least one team?
 
"Sept. 28, 2012: Los Angeles greenlights $1.2 billion football stadium: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/28/us-la-footballstadium-idUSBRE88R1ET20120928"

I can't count the number of times they've "greenlit" a stadium in L.A. County only to have the whole thing fall through either because of finances, environmental issues or regulatory issues since the 1990s. Don't hold your breath. If all the announcements made since 1990 had panned out, LA would have football stadia in Inglewood, Pasadena and a completely rebuilt Coliseum. None of them happened.

There's a much better prospect for a new Buffalo facility (if one's needed) than anything in southern California.
 
i like to play Sim City...
so the stadium discussion is probably the
only thing that excites me as much as radio....

a few places that would be interseting options...
1. Grand Island ?
2. Rochester ?
and 3. the most likely selection
The Waterfront... seriously (best choice) and will tie in
with the media/radio/ broadcasting...a state of the art
facility on the waterfront as well....

but in seven years, pretty much after another
4-14 season (yes 18 game season) lol .. and
the same ol..same ol...we will be having the same discussion
with different post-ers

lets just say I hope I am wrong...
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom